Supreme Court Justice John Roberts has been left “shaken” by the unexpected public reaction to his ruling in the Donald Trumppresidential immunity case, a columnist wrote Friday.
Slate’s judicial writer Dahlia Lithwick wrote that Roberts was left shocked that Americans didn’t buy his attempt to persuade them that his ruling was not about Trump, but instead focused on the office of the presidency. The court ruled that a president was largely immune from criminal prosecution for official actions.
Lithwick referenced a report by CNN’s Joan Biskupic. He “was shaken by the adverse public reaction to his decision affording [Donald] Trump substantial immunity from criminal prosecution," she wrote.
"His protestations that the case concerned the presidency, not Trump, held little currency.”
Yeah, no. That’s an 8th grade understanding of the concept where you never learned anything after.
Impeachment has nothing to do with whether actions are legal or illegal, and has nothing to do with criminal charges. Impeachment is a political process with the ultimate result being removal from office.
Impeachment and removal from office does not mean they would go to jail, it is not a criminal trial. It literally just removes the person from office.
Prior to this decision, Presidential acts could still be prosecuted if they were criminal, DOJ policy just meant that a sitting president wouldn’t be charged.
This Supreme Court decided that anything the President does, even if it is clearly and overtly illegal, but done as part of the Presidential duties, is inherently immune from prosecution.
Impeachment is a political process with the ultimate result being removal from office.
And potentially the removal of that person’s ability to ever run for office again.
Impeachment and removal from office does not mean they would go to jail, it is not a criminal trial.
Yes, that’s the design. Because it’s not an “impartial” process but a political one. And because only 40 or so people have been given that protection, it makes perfect sense.
That’s an 8th grade understanding of the concept where you never learned anything after.
The 8th grade understanding is the correct one. As confirmed by SCOTUS.
Remember the DOJ reports to the President. A process where you’re either suppose to investigate your boss or investigate your Boss’s political allies/opponents would be way to open for abuse.
Trump can be prosecuted for what he did before the Presidency (as is being done in New York) and for what he has and will do after the Presidency (should he run back J6 part deuce). But for crimes committed while President impeachment is counterbalance.
The 8th grade understanding is the correct one. As confirmed by SCOTUS.
The SCOTUS that made that decision via a majority run by a political party actively trying to speedrun a fascist takeover of the country. The decision was made specifically to protect a twice impeached Republican who stole thousands of classified documents when he left office.
The current SCORUS is clearly filled with partisan hacks and they’ve thrown out any attempt at hiding that fact now.
Clearly that wasn’t the thought process decades ago before this hyper partisan court. Nixon was explicitly pardoned to avoid prosecution for his crimes. So obviously the idea that the President had blanket immunity wasn’t a fucking thing.
Nixon was explicitly pardoned to avoid prosecution for his crimes.
Congress didn’t have to stop the impeachment of Nixon. They chose too because Nixon agreed to never run for office again.
If we want that to change we need an Amendment that established an Independent, non-partisan Prosecutor whose job it is to prosecute Presidents and former Presidents.
